Upgrade.Vet

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101611

Original file (MD1101611.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110621

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:

Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         USMCR (DEP)       20020228 - 20020818     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020819     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20060302      H ighest Rank:
Length of Service : Y ea rs M on ths 15 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 64
MOS: 9971
Proficiency/Conduct M arks (# of occasions): 3.1 / 2.3   Fitness R eports:

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle EX NDSM

Periods of UA : 20030125 - 20030126 (2), 20030215 - 20030302 (16), 20030316 - 20030412 (28), 20030415 - 20030604 (50), 20030613 - 20040111 (209)

Period of CONF: 20040115 - 20040325 (71)

NJP:

- 20030310:      Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 20030215 - 20030302, 16 days)
         Awarded: FOP RESTR EPD Suspended: NONE

- 20030613 :       Article 86 (Absence without leave, 20030316 - 20030412, 28 days)
         Article 134 (General Article, breaking restriction)
         Awarded: RIR FOP RESTR Suspended:

SCM: NONE         CC: NONE

SPCM: 1

- 20040326 :       Art icle 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 20030613 - 20040112, 209 days)
         Sentence : RIR FOP CONF 90 days (20040115 - 20040325, 71 days) BCD

Retention Warning Counseling : 2

- 20030129 :       For absence without leave, 20030125 - 20030126, 2 days

- 200 3 0310 :       For absence without leave, 20030215 - 20030302, 16 days

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB note d an administrative error on the original DD Form 214:

         “ 20030125 - 20030126 (2), 20030215 - 20030302 (16), 20030316 - 20030412 (28), 20030415 - 20030604 (50), 20030613 - 20040111 (209), 20040115 - 20040325 (71) ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related to Military Service:
         DD 214:          Service/ Medical Record:          Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:
         Employment:               Finances:                 Education/Training:
         Health/Medical Records:          Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:
         Personal Documentation :          Community Service:                References:
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:          From /To Representation:          From /To Congress m ember :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURT-MARTIAL , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(a), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .

C . Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade for employment opportunities.
2.       The Applicant contends h e was unjustly treated by his command after claiming he was a C onscientious O bjector.
3.       The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0 8 21          Location: Washington D.C .         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .

Discussion

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al a ffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant . The Applicant’s record of service included two 6105 counseling warnings , two non-judicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 2 specifications : Specification 1: 2 0030215 - 20030302, 16 days and Specification 2: 20030316 - 20030412, 28 days) and Article 134 (General Article, breaking restriction) , and one S pecial C ourt- M artial for violation of the UCMJ: Art icle 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 20030613 - 20040112, 209 days). The Applicant was found guilty at Special Court-Martial and awa rded a Bad Conduct Discharge.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade for employment opportunities. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was unjustly treated by his command after claiming he was a C onscientious O bjector. The Applicant provided no evidence nor do his service records indicate that he had been treated unfairly after his claim as a C onscientious O bjector. While his application was being processed, he had an obligation to follow orders as a Marine. The NDRB determined that his Bad Conduct Discharge was equitable considering the numerous periods of extended unauthorized absences. Clemency denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration. The Applicant provided a personal statement, letters from his father and pastor, and letters of reference from the American Red Cross. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and UCMJ violations. Clemency denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction before submitting such a complaint. The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil . ”

Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disable d American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review.

Service Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

Employment/Educational Opportunities : The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons. Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ): Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the NDRB Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400950

Original file (MD1400950.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20051020 - 20051202Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20051203Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20091201Highest Rank: Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)29 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:59MOS: 0311Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301220

Original file (MD1301220.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801957

Original file (ND0801957.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service or grade. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601111

Original file (ND0601111.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation 20030429: Naval Medical Center Portsmouth. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:20030523Reason for Discharge Least Favorable Characterization: Record Supports Narrative Reason: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20030529Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700924

Original file (ND0700924.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 19980409 - 20011119 ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. Discharge Process Date Notified: 20030522Reason for Discharge:Least Favorable...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601221

Original file (MD0601221.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

20040128: Applicant from confinement.20040325: SummaryCourt-Martial. (20040405) SJA review (date): (20040412)Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, MARINE CORPS BASE, CAMP LEJEUNE (20040415) Basis for discharge directed: due to: Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20040422 Additional Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardTotal Number of Pages: 5 Related to Period of Service Under Review: From Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001770

Original file (ND1001770.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20031121 - 20040829Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20040830Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20071207Highest Rank/Rate:CTM3Length of Service: Years Months08 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 79EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.3(4)Behavior:3.8(4)OTA: 3.36Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700813

Original file (ND0700813.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s service was marred by the award of two nonjudicial punishment (NJP), Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence) and Article 121 (Larceny), and conviction in a civil court for Driving Under the Influence, Reckless Driving, Urinating in Public, and Passing on the Shoulder. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700248

Original file (ND0700248.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review,...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801944

Original file (MD0801944.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, medical records that are presumed to be his mother’s, written statement of post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101611

Similar Decisions